Disposed

Pasula Hanumantha Reddy v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC13 Feb 2024WP(PIL)/167/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Public Interest Litigation regarding the restoration of a damaged road via certain villages in Kurnool District, where the petitioner sought a Writ of Mandamus to halt heavy sand lorry traffic and rebuild the road for bus and ambulance access. The Court found that the Government had already sanctioned funds and the tender process was underway, leading to the disposal of the petition without furt

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition was disposed of without cost; no further relief was granted as the government had already initiated the remedial project.

Pasula Hanumantha Reddy Vs the State of Ap — Landlord and Tenant | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY. THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY

¶4

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

A
if)

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶8

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R RAG HUNAN DAN RAO WP(PIL) NO: 167 OF 2022

¶9

Between:

¶10

Pasula Hanumantha Reddy, S/o. Pasula Manikya Reddy, aged about 63 years, R/o. H.No. 1-158, Kapageri Street, Kondapuram Village and Post, C. Belagal Mandal. Kurncol District, Presently residing at Flat No. 303, Teja Deluxe Apartment, Gypson Colony, Kurnool City Mobile No.9494222666 Aadhar Card No.769114142276

¶11

Petitioner.

¶12

AND

¶13

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Chief Secretary.^A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District

¶14

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Roads and Buildings Department, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District

¶15

The District Collector, Kurnool District. Kurnool

¶16

The Engineer in Chief, R and B Department, Major^District Roads State HOD Office Buildings, M.G Road, Labbipet, Vijayawada, Krishna District

¶17

The Superintendent Engineer, R8513 Circle, Kurnool District Kurnool

¶18

The Managing Director, APPTD(APSRTC), RTC House,^1st Floor. NTR Administrative Block, Pandit Nehru Bus Station, Vijayawada, NTR District

¶19

The Regional Manager, APPTD(APSRTC), APSRTC Regional Office, Kurnool, Kurnool District

¶20

'i ^''!

¶21

! 8., The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal.Secreta ry, y Finance and Planning Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District.

¶22

( Respondent no.8 impleaded as per court order dt. 18.10.2023 vide l ANo 1 of 2023 in W.P(PIL) 167 of 2022)

¶23

Respondents Petition under Article Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the illegal action of the respondents in not restoring the Kurnool to Mantralayam R & B Road via Thimmandbddi, Sangala, Gundrevula, Kondapuram, Paladoddi, Mudumala Erladinne, K. Singavaram and Kothakota Villages of C. Belagal Mandal, Kurnool District which is totally damaged with big ditches and potholes resulting in non plying of RTC buses and ambulances also only due to the clandestine action of allowing sand lorries/trucks with up to 50 to 60 tonnes on the aforesaid R & B road, inspite of the untold and unbearable hardship being faced by the people/ students/ senior citizens/patients/pregnant women which is being reported in print and electronic media widely apart from the representation of the petitioner along with sarpanches of the said villagers dated 13.07.2022, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 19. 21 of The Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to lay/restore the aforesaid R and B road by facilitating to ply RTC buses and ambulances apart from smooth flow of traffic with a further direction to forbear the plying of sand lorries with above 20 tonnes.

¶24

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶25

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to forthwith restore the Kurnool to Mantralayam R & B Road via Thimmandoddi Sangala, Gundrevula, Kondapuram, Paladoddi, Mudumala, Erladinne, K. Singavaram and Kothakota Villages of C. Belagal Mandal, Kurnool District by facilitating RTC buses and ambulances to ply on the aforesaid road.

¶26

IA.N0.1 OF 2023:

¶27

Pasula Hanumantha Reddy, S/o. Pasula Manikya Reddy, aged about 63 years, R/o. H.No. 1-158, Kapageri Street, Kondapuram Village and Post, C. Belagal Mandal, Kurncol District, Presently residing at Flat No. 303, Teja Deluxe Apartment, Gypson Colony, Kurnool City Mobile No.9494222666 Aadhar Card No.769114142276

¶28

Petitioner.

¶29

AND

¶30

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Chief Secretary,^A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District

¶31

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Roads and Buildings Department, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District

¶32

The District Collector, Kurnool District, Kurnool

¶33

The Engineer in Chief, R and B Department, Major District Roads State HOD Office Buildings, M.G Road, Labbipet, Vijayawada, Krishna District

¶34

The Superintendent Engineer, R8513 Circle, Kurnool District Kurnool

¶35

The Managing Director, APPTD(APSRTC), RTC House, 1st Floor, NTR Administrative Block, Pandit Nehru Bus Station, Vijayawada, NTR District

¶36

The Regional Manager, APPTD(APSRTC). APSRTC Regional Office, Kurnool, Kurnool District

¶37

8.The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Finance and Planning Department, Secretariat, Veiagapudi, Guntur District.

¶38

Proposed

¶39

Respondent/Respondent

¶40

Counsel for the PetitionenSRI. K. RATHANGA PANI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR GAD

¶41

Counsel for the Respondents No.2 to 5: GP FOR ROADS

¶42

BUILDINGS

¶43

Counsel for the Respondents No.6,7: SRI. K. VISWANATHAM SC

¶44

FOR APSRTC

¶45

Counsel for the Respondent No.8: GP FOR FINANCE AND

¶46

PLANNING

¶47

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶48

m THE HIGH COURT OP ANDHRA PRADESH [3446 AMARAVATI ] (Special OrigmalJurisdiotioii)

¶49

WEDNESDAY ,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY POUR

¶50

PRESENT

¶51

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶52

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶53

W.P(PIL^ No: 167 OF 2088

¶54

Between:

¶55

PASULA HANUMANTHA REDDY, S/o. Pasula Manikya Reddy, aged about 63 years, R/o. H.No. 1-158, Kapageri^ Street, Kondapuram ViUage and Post, G. Belagal Mandal, Kurncol District, Presently residing at Plat No. 303, Teja Deluxe Apartment, Gypson Colony, Kurnool City Mobile No.9494222666 Aadhar Card No.769114142276

¶56

... Petitioner

¶57

AND

¶58

THE STATE OF AP, Rep. by its Chief Secretary, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District

¶59

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Roads and Buildings Department, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntup District

¶60

The District Collector, Kurnool District, Kurnool

¶61

The Engineer in Chief, R 8v B Department, Major District Roads, State HOD Office Buildings, M.G Road, Labbipet, Vijayawada, Krishna District

¶62

The Superintendent Engineer, R8513 Circle, Kurnool^District Kurnool

¶63

The Managing Director, APPTD(APSRTC), RTG House, 1st Floor, NTR Administrative Block, Pandit Nehru Bus Station, Vijayawada, NTR District

¶64

<br>

¶65

The Regional Manager, APPTD(APSRTG), APSRTC Regional Office, Kurnool, Kurnool District

¶66

The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Finance and Planning Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntnp District Respondent no.8 impleaded as per coimt^order dt.18.10.2023 vide I.A.No 1 of 2023 in W.P(PIL) 167^{of 2022}

¶67

... Respondents

¶68

pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the illegal action of the respondents in not restoring the K-urnool to Mantralayam^R85B Road via Thimmandoddi, Sangala, Gundrevula, Kondapuram, Paladoddi, Mudumala, Erladinne, K. Singavaram and Kothakota Villages of C. Belagal Mandal, Kurnool District. which is totally damaged with big ditches and potholes resulting in non plying of RTC buses and ambulances also only due to the clandestine^action of allowing sand lorries/trucks with up to 50 to 60 tonnes^onthe aforesaid R85 B road, inspite of the untold and unbearable hardship being faced by the people/ students/ senior citizens/patients/pregnant women which is being reported in print and electronic media widely apart from the representation^ofthe petitioner along with sarpanches of the said villagers dated 13.07.2022, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 19, 21 of The Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to lay/restore the aforesaid R and B road by facilitating to ply RTC buses and ambulances apart from smooth flow of traffic with a further direction to forbear the plying of sand lorries with^above 20^tonnes and to pass

¶69

lANO: 1 OF 2023

¶70

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit the petitioner to implead the proposed respondent in W.P(PIL) No. 167/2022 and as^wellasinI.A No. 1 of 2022 as party respondent No. 8 and pass

¶71

lANO: 1 OF 2022

¶72

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents^toforthwith restore the Kurnool to Mantralayam R 86 B Road via Thimmandoddi, Sangala, Gundrevula, Kondapuram, Paladoddi, Mudumala, Erladinne, K. Singavaram and Kothakota Villages of C. Belagal Mandal, Kurnool

¶73

¶74

District by facilitating RTC buses and ambulances to ply on the aforesaid road and pass

¶75

Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri. K. Rathanga Pani Reddy

¶76

Counsel for Respondent No. 1: Government Pleader for^GAD Counsel for Respondent Nos.S to 5: Government Pleader^forRoads8e Buildings

¶77

Counsel for Respondent Nos.6 & 7: Standing Counsel^forAPSRTG Counsel for Respondent No.8: Government Pleader for^Finance8e Planning

¶78

The Court made the following:

¶79

The grievance of the writ petitioner in the present petition was with regard to the inaction of the official respondents in taking steps for making the road from Sunkesula to Magaladinne, which^isastretchof approximately 14 kms, roadworthy.

¶80

Pursuant to the order issued in this regard by this Goin?t, We' were informed on the previous date of hearing i.e., 31.01.2024^thatsanction for an amormt of Rs.32.00 crores had already been, granted by'the Government and a Government Order was issued in that regard. With a view to inform this Court whether NIT has been issued or not. time was sought and today, we are informed that NIT has since^{beenissuedand} bids have been received and that the contract would be finalized with the ehgible bidders very shortly.

¶81

In' that view of the matter, it appears that the Government is taking concrete steps to ensure that the road supra is made user worthy and therefore, in our opinion, we need not continue the present proceedings further. The Government is expected to ensure completion of the said project at the earhest. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶82

Pending miscellaneous apphcations, if any, shall stand^closed.

¶83

//TRUE COPY//

¶84

SD/- G. HELA NAIDU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR V

¶85

SECTION OFFICER

¶86

To,

¶87

The Chief Secretary, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat,

¶88

Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District

¶89

The Principal Secretary, Roads and Buildings Department,^State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati,^Guntur District

¶90

The District Collector, Kurnool District, Kurnool

¶91

The Engineer in Chief, R and B Department, Major^{DistrictRoads,} Slate HOD Office Buildings, M.G Road, Labbipet, Vijayawada, Krishna District

¶92

The Superintendent Engineer, R8513 Circle, Kurnool^District Kurnool

¶93

The Managing Director. APPTD(APSRTC), RTC House, 1st Floor, NTR Administrative Block, Pandit Nehru Bus Station, Vijayawada, NTR District

¶94

The Regional Manager, APPTD(APSRTC), APSRTC Regional Office, Kurnool, Kurnool District

¶95

The Principal Secretary, Finance and Planning Department,^State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District.

¶96

( Respondent no.8 impleaded as per court order dt. 18.10.2023 vide

¶97

I.A.No 1 of 2023 in W.P(PIL) 167 of 2022)

¶98

One CC to SRI. K. RATHANGA PANI REDDY Advocate [OPUC]

¶99

Two CCs to GP FOR ROADS BUILDINGS .High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶100

Two CCs to GP FOR GAD .High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT]

¶101

Two CCs to GP FOR FINANCE AND PLANNING. High Court^of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶102

One CC to SRI. K. VISWANATHAM, Advocate SC FOR APSRTC [OPUC]

¶103

Three C.D.Copies

¶104

¶105

The Managing Director. APPTD(APSRTC), RTC House,^1stFloor NTR Administrative Block, Pandit Nehru. Bus Station, Vijayawada NTR District

¶106

The Regional Manager, APPTD(APSRTC), APSRTC Regional Office, Kurnool, Kurnool District

¶107

The Principal Secretary, Finance and Planning Department,^State of Andhra Pradesh. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur^District.

¶108

( Respondent no.8 impleaded as per court order dt. 18.10.2023 vide

¶109

I.A.NO 1 of 2023 in W;P(PIL) 167 of 2022)

¶110

One CC to SRI. K. RATHANGA PANI REDDY Advocate [OPUC]

¶111

Two CCs to GP FOR ROADS BUILDINGS .High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶112

Two CCs to GP FOR GAD .High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶113

Two CCs to GP FOR FINANCE AND PLANNING, High Court^of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶114

One CC to SRI. K. VISWANATHAM, Advocate SC FOR APSRTC [OPUC]

¶115

Three C.D.Copies

¶116

¶117

HIGH COURT DATED:14/02/2024

¶118

ORDER WP(PIL).No.167 of 2022

¶119

.0f
g onuim Mrn
PATC

¶120

DISPOSING OF THE WP(PIL) WITHOUT COSTS

¶121

•• V

Pasula Hanumantha Reddy v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pasula Hanumantha Reddy v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration Vs Smt. Yathapu Manoharamma

Santhoshi Majhi Vs Dr Ntr University of Health Sciences

Santhoshi Majhi Vs Dr. Ntr University of Health Sciences

The Commissioner of Customs, Vs M/s Omm Agroexim Pvt. Ltd.

M/S Sri Venkatasai Granites Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Venkatasai Granites Vs State of Andhra Pradesh